If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by bankside

There is no self-evident right to deadly weaponry that flows from natural justice. i.e. the American constitution is wrong. There is a right to self-defence - an entirely different thing, with incredibly different consequences for a society and for the death rate within it.

The right includes the means. To assert that someone can tell others what those means may be restricted to is to make those others into slaves. The only rational limitation others may impose on someone's selection of means is to say it must not inherently endanger bystanders -- that's why the ban on automatic weapons is legitimate, if wrongly done; it's also why a limitation on the free use of large-capacity magazines would be legitimate.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

You aren't listening. You throw out vague, ambiguous judgments and 'suggestions' which you then immediately spin around and accuse us of being emotional liars for accepting at face value.

Why don't you lay out your plan, clearly and concisely, with no wiggle room. I've seen you say everything from get rid of laws banning guns in classrooms to teachers should be armed to volunteer Minutemen type people should be posted in schools to everything else. I have no idea what your solution is. I only know that whenever I repeat anything YOU HAVE SAID, you come back and say I'm lying. So explain what your solution is, and don't give me this lame excuse about "you're tired of repeating yourself", you've never once been clear, you spend most of your responses telling people they're "lying" or "aren't reading" when they repeat what they believe you have proposed.

Apparently you didn't read it before:

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

short version of my proposals:

1. on the "last resort" end, arm willing teachers; all information concerning who is armed and who isn't, at which schools, is confidential, so would-be shooters can't know ahead of time if they'll manage their 'blaze of gory' or get taken out promptly

2. use Congress Art I Sec 8 authority to discipline and organize the militia to specify that while magazines of over twenty rounds capacity may be owned, they are to be stored and used only at a gun club, shooting range, or other such facility, except for competition events

3. authorize all colleges and other public institutions to report individuals deemed dangerous, and require that reporting if federal funds are being received, to the NICS system so a flag will prevent the person from buying firearms

4. open the NICS system to all sellers, whether dealers or not

5. begin federal funding for mental health care aimed at restoring levels to whatever maximum a given locale had in the last thirty years, plus adding ten thousand beds in "casual care" facilities, to which the mentally ill can be diverted instead of sent to jail, and where people feeling destructive can drop in for refuge

As an addendum to #1, I'd like a bill to include that the NRA is the designated training organization, something for which it will receive only Congressional thanks -- no funds -- and that teachers may be charged no more than $10 per course. It would never fly, but I'd love to see the faces of LaPierre and his ilk if they got required to actually help instead of grandstand.

Regarding #2, there's a whole discourse on the militia concept integral to the Second Amendment involved; suffice it to say that under that system, militias (and individuals) could have weapons considered not appropriate for common (everyday) use, but they had to be stored at an arsenal. We don't have arsenals, but gun clubs can take their place.

For #5, I know there's no chance Congress will do that, but if they don't, the rest is pointless.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

The right includes the means. To assert that someone can tell others what those means may be restricted to is to make those others into slaves. The only rational limitation others may impose on someone's selection of means is to say it must not inherently endanger bystanders -- that's why the ban on automatic weapons is legitimate, if wrongly done; it's also why a limitation on the free use of large-capacity magazines would be legitimate.

The gun itself endangers bystanders. And the hyperbolic nonsense about slavery just sounds like LaPierre. Please keep talking; it's unintentionally good for the debate.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

1. on the "last resort" end, arm willing teachers; all information concerning who is armed and who isn't, at which schools, is confidential, so would-be shooters can't know ahead of time if they'll manage their 'blaze of gory' or get taken out promptly

And what would be your proposed fallback plan if 80, 90, 95% of teachers opted not to carry in the classroom for the whole host of reasons people have given? (The biggest one to me beyond their desire not to would be liability, if a student steals a teacher's key and gets into their guns who is responsible? No teacher will want to deal with that kind of liability imo.)

2. use Congress Art I Sec 8 authority to discipline and organize the militia to specify that while magazines of over twenty rounds capacity may be owned, they are to be stored and used only at a gun club, shooting range, or other such facility, except for competition events

I'm sure someone about to take out a classroom or movie theater will respect this law that he can't use his high capacity ammo clips because he's not intending to do his shooting in a gun club or shooting range.

3. authorize all colleges and other public institutions to report individuals deemed dangerous, and require that reporting if federal funds are being received, to the NICS system so a flag will prevent the person from buying firearms

I am not against this per se and actually I believe to a fairly high degree this already happens whether it's required by law or not, but let's be clear. Not everyone was someone who gave everyone around them ample time to realize they were dangerous-- VA Tech for example, who really didn't have many friends and wasn't close with his roommate and suddenly went off his anti-psychotic medications. Let's also be clear that the sort of witch hunting that tends to go on after these accusations turns into those stories where kids get expelled because they pointed a finger at a classmate and said "bang" or "brandished a stapler like a weapon while playing." Overreactions do happen and I get the feeling in other circumstances you'd be against someone being called upon to prove their clean mental state or psychological state because a classmate or colleague labelled them dangerous.

4. open the NICS system to all sellers, whether dealers or not

5. begin federal funding for mental health care aimed at restoring levels to whatever maximum a given locale had in the last thirty years, plus adding ten thousand beds in "casual care" facilities, to which the mentally ill can be diverted instead of sent to jail, and where people feeling destructive can drop in for refuge

While these are good suggestions the scuttlebutt I've heard is that what kicked off Newtown's killing starting with the shooter's mother was the mother talking about committing her son because of his mental issues. The VA Tech shooter was getting psychiatric help. So if we say "there's more healthcare out there", how does that help prevent situations like these two where the killing happens before the help process starts, or even AFTER they're already receiving help? How does it address that people this mentally ill have access to high capacity semiautomatics and ammo clips?

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

And what would be your proposed fallback plan if 80, 90, 95% of teachers opted not to carry in the classroom for the whole host of reasons people have given? (The biggest one to me beyond their desire not to would be liability, if a student steals a teacher's key and gets into their guns who is responsible? No teacher will want to deal with that kind of liability imo.)

If there are two or three in each school, that would be a vast improvement. The big point is that a potential mass shooter is going to hesitate to attack a school because there would be a good chance someone there would be able to kill him right off, ruining his bloody scene, and he'd have no way to tell who -- so unless he was dead set on shooting at a school, odds are he'd choose another place.

The idea would be for the teacher to engage in concealed carry. If some wanted to store the firearm in their desks, number-pad combination locks should be supplied -- there are a couple of good ones that use a five-digit sequences that has to be entered in the right order.

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

I'm sure someone about to take out a classroom or movie theater will respect this law that he can't use his high capacity ammo clips because he's not intending to do his shooting in a gun club or shooting range.

He wouldn't have a choice -- the only place he could even have a high-capacity magazine in his possession would be at the facility where it's stored. For buying one, the facility's address would have to be given and it would be delivered there, not to the buyer to take along. He wouldn't be able to break into a home to get one for the same reason: all large capacity magazines would be at approved facilities, under penalty of law (whether misdemeanor or felony would depend on details).

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

I am not against this per se and actually I believe to a fairly high degree this already happens whether it's required by law or not, but let's be clear. Not everyone was someone who gave everyone around them ample time to realize they were dangerous-- VA Tech for example, who really didn't have many friends and wasn't close with his roommate and suddenly went off his anti-psychotic medications. Let's also be clear that the sort of witch hunting that tends to go on after these accusations turns into those stories where kids get expelled because they pointed a finger at a classmate and said "bang" or "brandished a stapler like a weapon while playing." Overreactions do happen and I get the feeling in other circumstances you'd be against someone being called upon to prove their clean mental state or psychological state because a classmate or colleague labelled them dangerous.

It doesn't happen, because there's no mechanism under the law for the NICS to get or pay attention to such data.

But it would have nothing to do with a "classmate or colleague", it would have to do with the institution , as where the college expelled the Arizona shooter because he was considered dangerous. I don't know what their process was, but plainly it was a formal and official one. So this would be a matter of a person clearly showing himself a danger in such a way that it came to official notice and was determined by official investigation.

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

While these are good suggestions the scuttlebutt I've heard is that what kicked off Newtown's killing starting with the shooter's mother was the mother talking about committing her son because of his mental issues. The VA Tech shooter was getting psychiatric help. So if we say "there's more healthcare out there", how does that help prevent situations like these two where the killing happens before the help process starts, or even AFTER they're already receiving help? How does it address that people this mentally ill have access to high capacity semiautomatics and ammo clips?

With a decent basic system in place, the mother could have just taken him for an evaluation without giving any warning that was what she was doing. The problem here was that she had to hunt for how to do it, then plan ahead, which let him be warned.

A decent system would also have allowed these guys to get care earlier and given them a good chance to get stable before reaching such extreme straits.

And with the above provisions, they wouldn't be able to have access to the high capacity magazines for public use. Besides which, they only have "access" now by theft.

Last edited by Kulindahr; December 30th, 2012 at 08:38 PM.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

If there are two or three in each school, that would be a vast improvement. The big point is that a potential mass shooter is going to hesitate to attack a school because there would be a good chance someone there would be able to kill him right off, ruining his bloody scene, and he'd have no way to tell who -- so unless he was dead set on shooting at a school, odds are he'd choose another place.

You seem to be applying some kind of maniacal, calculated Dr Evil-style persona to these shooters, but the vast majority of mass shootings occur in a venue relevant to the shooter, usually motivated by revenge, anger, displacement, dismissal etc. And generally they walk into these places with the knowledge that they won't be walking out alive. They aren't going to be dissuaded because a few teachers may have guns. If anything, it may even stimulate the act of anger or revenge more. They're walking into a place to make a statement. Guns are not going to dissuade a shooter who wants to wreak havoc on the people he blames for his troubled life.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by bankside

People do not need to be protected from their government. It is theirs. It is of themselves. People need to have their government protected from falling into the hands of tyrants. But the principle remains that one of the methods of exercising freedom is to establish a government that governs.

You apparently haven't read any of the founding documents of the United States or the documents that they used as the basis for their philosophies. They state precisely that people need to be protected from their government, and the constitution exists precisely to do that.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by bankside

There is no self-evident right to deadly weaponry that flows from natural justice. i.e. the American constitution is wrong. There is a right to self-defence - an entirely different thing, with incredibly different consequences for a society and for the death rate within it.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by JayHawk

Right... were you on planet earth when the democrats were pushing a single payer plan and got all kinds of throw back from the conservatives who pretended at that point that they were going to be big grown up legislators.

So that all aside your method for increased mental health services works out to what exactly?

I mean anyone can offer ideas they find absurd to implement but the difficulty is finding something both sides will agree to and can accomplish the required service. So what say you? Besides saying what every everyone is saying. You know, that we need better health care but only in the mental health portion.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

Let's be clear that nearly all of the shortcomings of the program were the result of nearly 4 years of Republican filibustering and dealbreaking after being repeatedly given concessions in the bill that they demanded.

You don't get to support the Republican party and then criticize a bill that is weaker than progressives wanted it to be because of REpublican filibustering. Some logic, please.

Who's supporting the republican party? I really would like to know where you're pulling that lie from. They fucked with a process just to fuck with it. The democratic proposal, single payer and all, would have not only been preferable to what we actually got, but also preferable to any of the republican counter proposals. Every single legislator that voted for the final bill, or refused to support a bill that actually fixed the system, deserves our scorn.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by JB3

Who's supporting the republican party? I really would like to know where you're pulling that lie from. They fucked with a process just to fuck with it. The democratic proposal, single payer and all, would have not only been preferable to what we actually got, but also preferable to any of the republican counter proposals. Every single legislator that voted for the final bill, or refused to support a bill that actually fixed the system, deserves our scorn.

You've apparently missed my point which is that the only reason we didn't get a better healthcare bill was because Republicans spent almost 4 years engaging in 100% "we're against anything Obama is for, let's make him a one-term President who accomplished nothing" and not because they had legitimate, sensible, or reasonable problems with the better healthcare proposal.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by Kulindahr

If there are two or three in each school, that would be a vast improvement. The big point is that a potential mass shooter is going to hesitate to attack a school because there would be a good chance someone there would be able to kill him right off, ruining his bloody scene, and he'd have no way to tell who -- so unless he was dead set on shooting at a school, odds are he'd choose another place.

The idea would be for the teacher to engage in concealed carry. If some wanted to store the firearm in their desks, number-pad combination locks should be supplied -- there are a couple of good ones that use a five-digit sequences that has to be entered in the right order.

#1 You're ignoring the fact that many schools-- possibly even most-- would still have no armed teacher-vigilantes in a 100% voluntary carry system.

#2 I fail to see how a gun secured in a combination lock is a practical defense against someone walking into the room and firing.

He wouldn't have a choice -- the only place he could even have a high-capacity magazine in his possession would be at the facility where it's stored. For buying one, the facility's address would have to be given and it would be delivered there, not to the buyer to take along. He wouldn't be able to break into a home to get one for the same reason: all large capacity magazines would be at approved facilities, under penalty of law (whether misdemeanor or felony would depend on details).

So this would limit public spree killers to how many weapons they could carry with standard ammo clips, perhaps cutting the number killed in large sprees from pushing 30 to pushing what.... 20?

If semiautomatic guns THEMSELVES had to be kept at these approved facilities when not in use the whole ability to carry out a spree shooting dramatically drops off, doesn't it?

But it would have nothing to do with a "classmate or colleague", it would have to do with the institution , as where the college expelled the Arizona shooter because he was considered dangerous. I don't know what their process was, but plainly it was a formal and official one. So this would be a matter of a person clearly showing himself a danger in such a way that it came to official notice and was determined by official investigation.

This doesn't address the issue I raised of what if the space of time between someone appearing dangerous and carrying out their spree is too short for an official response from the institution in question-- again, see Virginia Tech.

With a decent basic system in place, the mother could have just taken him for an evaluation without giving any warning that was what she was doing. The problem here was that she had to hunt for how to do it, then plan ahead, which let him be warned.

A decent system would also have allowed these guys to get care earlier and given them a good chance to get stable before reaching such extreme straits.

And with the above provisions, they wouldn't be able to have access to the high capacity magazines for public use. Besides which, they only have "access" now by theft.

I don't disagree with you that this is true. However the Virginia Tech student WAS receiving help, and went off his meds-- and many mentally ill people do this from time to time for any variety of reasons. I've heard everything from "The meds taste bad" to "I don't like how I feel on them" to "they decrease my sex drive" to "I just don't like being dependant on meds" to "I was feeling better.." And others. The answers you're giving me wouldn't have stopped even VA Tech let alone a future spree killing so that's why despite your constant claims that I'm not listening to you, these responses and solutions just aren't cutting it for me.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

#1 You're ignoring the fact that many schools-- possibly even most-- would still have no armed teacher-vigilantes in a 100% voluntary carry system.

I addressed this elsewhere. We'd just have to hope that the first guy who decided to risk hitting a school anyway would hit one with a couple of armed teachers who would take him down before he killed more than a couple of people -- that would ramp up the psychological deterrent.

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

#2 I fail to see how a gun secured in a combination lock is a practical defense against someone walking into the room and firing.

It's not, very, but you suggested it. I specified a keypad combination because one can be opened and defense weapon in hand within two seconds plus whatever it takes the teacher to get to the desk, if she isn't at it.

I also like something a friend told me about: someone has designed decorative Kevlar covers for several standard styles of school chairs -- it would be one more thing no bullets would go through. The same piece recommended a kind of window glass that has high-strength, very fine steel wire inside so even if someone shot out the glass, entry wouldn't be possible (the drawback of course being that exit would be more difficult in emergencies). I can't see schools going to the expense of replacing all their windows, but as some windows needed it they could do the upgrade.

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

So this would limit public spree killers to how many weapons they could carry with standard ammo clips, perhaps cutting the number killed in large sprees from pushing 30 to pushing what.... 20?

If semiautomatic guns THEMSELVES had to be kept at these approved facilities when not in use the whole ability to carry out a spree shooting dramatically drops off, doesn't it?

Requiring all semiautos to be stored at approved facilities wouldn't fly with the courts; it would be deemed an unreasonable burden. High-capacity magazines are a different matter, because a semiauto doesn't need one to be useful for self-defense.

And there is no way on this green earth that limiting magazine size to under sixteen is going to happen in the near future, so there's no point in trying -- remember "the art of the possible". If the high-capacity magazine storage law got passed and upheld, maybe in ten years raising the issue of storing all semiautos there might have a chance, but not now.

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

This doesn't address the issue I raised of what if the space of time between someone appearing dangerous and carrying out their spree is too short for an official response from the institution in question-- again, see Virginia Tech.

I don't disagree with you that this is true. However the Virginia Tech student WAS receiving help, and went off his meds-- and many mentally ill people do this from time to time for any variety of reasons. I've heard everything from "The meds taste bad" to "I don't like how I feel on them" to "they decrease my sex drive" to "I just don't like being dependant on meds" to "I was feeling better.." And others. The answers you're giving me wouldn't have stopped even VA Tech let alone a future spree killing so that's why despite your constant claims that I'm not listening to you, these responses and solutions just aren't cutting it for me.

There is no magic solution to any of this. But as with the budget problem, if we sit around whining for a complete solution, we'll never get anywhere. What I'm looking at is what could be done, now, within the concept of militia, because doing it that way will give it a darned good chance of standing up in the courts despite Wayne LaPierre and his elite parasites.

The situation at Virginia Tech and elsewhere is why the last ditch solution has to be part of the deal: if someone is there to shoot back, his spree won't go as long -- with, of course, proper training, which is why somewhere else I put out a training scheme requiring annual retraining and regular practice, etc. for concealed carry licenses.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by JB3

You apparently haven't read any of the founding documents of the United States or the documents that they used as the basis for their philosophies. They state precisely that people need to be protected from their government, and the constitution exists precisely to do that.

There have been a good 200+ years of societal evolution (including the fall of open imperialism, the rise and fall of Communism and two World Wars) since then, so what those documents say about protection from the government is about as relevant as what the Bible has to say about gays.

That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
- Gene Wolfe

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

So, yeah, I am gonna quote that, because Kuli skipped it:

Originally Posted by tombastep

It's funny to me that the same people who argue against more laws or restrictions say so because they say criminals will obtain the guns anyway, but at the same time arguing for Teachers or armed Guards at schools. Realizing that this wouldn't completely stop shootings, only deter them. Which is in fact what laws and restrictions would do.

Does the answer boil down to "yeah, but I'd still have my gun"?

By the way, with 95% refusal to carry guns, there would be vast territories of the country with no guns in a school at all. And as was already stated, the mindset of a suicidal mass shooter is not at all certain to be deterred by the knowledge of their presence to begin with. Those aren't some Dr Evil schemes, they're irrational rage-sprees that care very little for logistics.

That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
- Gene Wolfe

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Okay I'm holding my head in pain. Kul, seriously, we're talking about building things in school out of kevlar and installing keypad-controlled storage lockers for guns for teachers on school campuses and then hoping for the best.

Can you explain to me how this is a more sensible solution than stopping crazy people who can't pass background or mental health checks from buying guns and ammo.

It's not a sensible solution unless someone is working backwards from the pre-conclusion that we absolutely must at all costs not restrict firearms more than they already are. And I see absolutely no compelling reason whatsoever why any solution must pass through that goalpost for anyone other than you.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

Okay I'm holding my head in pain. Kul, seriously, we're talking about building things in school out of kevlar and installing keypad-controlled storage lockers for guns for teachers on school campuses and then hoping for the best.

Can you explain to me how this is a more sensible solution than stopping crazy people who can't pass background or mental health checks from buying guns and ammo.

It's not a sensible solution unless someone is working backwards from the pre-conclusion that we absolutely must at all costs not restrict firearms more than they already are. And I see absolutely no compelling reason whatsoever why any solution must pass through that goalpost for anyone other than you.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by Rolyo85

There have been a good 200+ years of societal evolution (including the fall of open imperialism, the rise and fall of Communism and two World Wars) since then, so what those documents say about protection from the government is about as relevant as what the Bible has to say about gays.

No, its not. The American citizen's relationship to their government has always been adversarial. It still is, and it will always be. Government is not something to be blindly trusted.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by xbuzzerx

You've apparently missed my point which is that the only reason we didn't get a better healthcare bill was because Republicans spent almost 4 years engaging in 100% "we're against anything Obama is for, let's make him a one-term President who accomplished nothing" and not because they had legitimate, sensible, or reasonable problems with the better healthcare proposal.

How is that infantile style of obstructionism Obama's fault exactly?

You're still confused. The democrats and president had no reason to listen to anything the republicans said. They could have passed what they wanted, if they had actually intended to do that.

Re: The NRA Solution is an insult to the Dead

Originally Posted by JB3

No. Your ideas that Americans want children dead is offensive. It is disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself.

No; what is disgusting is this slavish devotion to the useless and perverse Second Amendment, where dead children truly are considered the price of freedom. People with guns should be, regardless of their rights, streaming in by the thousands to lay down their arms so the world is less beholden to guns. They should be screaming to find a better way to keep the peace, preserve open government, and repel foreign invasion other than by the gun. Instead, ineptly and shamelessly, they argue that more guns will make children safer. Including the obnoxious idea that teachers should be armed, and including the grotesque idea that children's classroom chairs should be fitted with kevlar slip covers so that adults can go about their gun-toting unimpeded. It is a fucking disgrace, and I will never be embarrassed for saying so. What an odious, and obviously odious system you have.